Quote:
Originally Posted by Low C Sharp
Rats! This is what I was thinking, too. Now it's too late.
Look. We're talking about a process that involves thousands of young women devoting hundreds of thousands of hours over the course of each school year to their shmoozing skills, matching outfits, decorations, chants, song-and-dance routines, rotational techniques, and even seminars with marketing consultants.
It doesn't make sense to have an attack of the vapors when we learn that -- mercy! -- a consumer of this marketing is actually INFLUENCED by appearances! Break out the smelling salts.
If shallow marketing didn't work on PNMs, groups would not waste their time. I don't think anyone would have jumped down Vixen's throat for saying, "ABC's pref decorations were so beautiful! I felt like I was walking into a fairy castle! I decided right then on ABC!" But honestly, that kind of thing is even less substantive than attractiveness. You can probably learn more about the vibe of a group from the looks of the girls than you can from their skill at pinning Christmas lights to the ceiling.
|
I'm not trying to presume/assume anything, but did you read the whole thread with all her posts?
While it was fun to read someone being so open, to reduce the problem mentioned in the thread to merely having trouble with judging groups by the girls' appearance is an oversimplification, I think. She was pretty openly dismissive of many groups. She's not obligated to like everyone, but some stuff can be left unsaid, and if they are said, you're probably going to get judged for it.
I agree that using decorations would be no better a method to rank groups, but it would be less likely to deeply offend anyone because it's so much less personal.